These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

188 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31045653)

  • 21. Fit for the frontline? A focus group exploration of auditory tasks carried out by infantry and combat support personnel.
    Bevis ZL; Semeraro HD; van Besouw RM; Rowan D; Lineton B; Allsopp AJ
    Noise Health; 2014; 16(69):127-35. PubMed ID: 24804718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The impact of hearing protection on sound localization and orienting behavior.
    Simpson BD; Bolia RS; McKinley RL; Brungart DS
    Hum Factors; 2005; 47(1):188-98. PubMed ID: 15960096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Associations Between Auditory Working Memory, Self-Perceived Listening Effort, and Hearing Difficulty in Adults With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury.
    Lander DM; Liu S; Roup CM
    Ear Hear; 2024 May-Jun 01; 45(3):695-709. PubMed ID: 38229218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Warfighter auditory situation awareness: effects of augmented hearing protection/enhancement devices and TCAPS for military ground combat applications.
    Clasing JE; Casali JG
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Mar; 53 Suppl 2():S43-52. PubMed ID: 24564692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Introducing real-life listening features into the clinical test environment: Part II: Measuring the hearing performance and evaluating the listening effort of individuals with a hearing implant.
    Bräcker T; Hellmiss S; Batsoulis C; Petzold T; Gabel L; Möltner A; Stöver T; Mlynski R; Lenarz T; Büchner A
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2019 Jul; 20(4):165-175. PubMed ID: 30880637
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Signal detection and speech perception with level-dependent hearing protectors.
    Abel SM; Krever EM; Giguere C; Alberti PW
    J Otolaryngol; 1991 Feb; 20(1):46-53. PubMed ID: 2030537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Age-related changes in listening effort for various types of masker noises.
    Desjardins JL; Doherty KA
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):261-72. PubMed ID: 23095723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The effect of hearing protection devices on speech intelligibility of Persian employees.
    Karami M; Aliabadi M; Golmohammadi R; Hamidi Nahrani M
    BMC Res Notes; 2020 Nov; 13(1):529. PubMed ID: 33176877
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Situational Awareness: The Effect of Stimulus Type and Hearing Protection on Sound Localization.
    Fostick L; Fink N
    Sensors (Basel); 2021 Oct; 21(21):. PubMed ID: 34770351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Assessment of auditory spatial awareness in complex listening environments.
    Brungart DS; Cohen J; Cord M; Zion D; Kalluri S
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Oct; 136(4):1808-20. PubMed ID: 25324082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Memory performance on the Auditory Inference Span Test is independent of background noise type for young adults with normal hearing at high speech intelligibility.
    Rönnberg N; Rudner M; Lunner T; Stenfelt S
    Front Psychol; 2014; 5():1490. PubMed ID: 25566159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. How directional microphones affect speech recognition, listening effort and localisation for listeners with moderate-to-severe hearing loss.
    Picou EM; Ricketts TA
    Int J Audiol; 2017 Dec; 56(12):909-918. PubMed ID: 28738747
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Binaural processing and phonological awareness in Australian Indigenous children from the Northern Territory: A community based study.
    Sharma M; Wigglesworth G; Savage G; Demuth K
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2020 Jan; 128():109702. PubMed ID: 31606681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Benefit of Higher Maximum Force Output on Listening Effort in Bone-Anchored Hearing System Users: A Pupillometry Study.
    Bianchi F; Wendt D; Wassard C; Maas P; Lunner T; Rosenbom T; Holmberg M
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(5):1220-1232. PubMed ID: 30807542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Rerouting Hearing Aid Systems for Overcoming Simulated Unilateral Hearing in Dynamic Listening Situations.
    Picou EM; Lewis D; Angley G; Tharpe AM
    Ear Hear; 2020; 41(4):790-803. PubMed ID: 31584502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Pupil response as an indication of effortful listening: the influence of sentence intelligibility.
    Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Festen JM
    Ear Hear; 2010 Aug; 31(4):480-90. PubMed ID: 20588118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. The Influence of Noise Reduction on Speech Intelligibility, Response Times to Speech, and Perceived Listening Effort in Normal-Hearing Listeners.
    van den Tillaart-Haverkate M; de Ronde-Brons I; Dreschler WA; Houben R
    Trends Hear; 2017; 21():2331216517716844. PubMed ID: 28656807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Central auditory processing and listening effort in normal-hearing children: a pilot study.
    Danneels M; Degeest S; Dhooge I; Keppler H
    Int J Audiol; 2021 Oct; 60(10):739-746. PubMed ID: 33586570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Most Comfortable Listening Level and Speech Attenuation by Hearing Protectors.
    Letowski T; Magistro DM; Ritter AC
    Int J Occup Saf Ergon; 1995 Jan; 1(2):153-159. PubMed ID: 10603546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Better protection from blasts without sacrificing situational awareness.
    Killion MC; Monroe T; Drambarean V
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Mar; 50 Suppl 1():S38-45. PubMed ID: 21288067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.